Brighton i360 plans, are falling down..

desprateseagull

New member

Jul 20, 2003

10,171

brighton, actually

• Jul 21, 2015

• #1

http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/...lans-to-scrap-wind-turbine-from-the-top/41120

Wind turbine problems, and also rainwater harvesting set to be scrapped.. can't they work out a way to filter it, even for use to flush loos??


Were these a big part of the eyesore360 getting approved? Will B&H council (taxpayers) end up paying more, to keep this turd pole afloat, until income from 'flights' start?

If EVER?

 

Last edited: Jul 21, 2015

Everest

Me

Jul 5, 2003

20,741

Southwick

• Jul 21, 2015

• #2

“The wind turbine was expected to generate around 20 per cent of the energy for the vertical cable car’s ascent.
But by capturing energy on the vertical cable car descent, we will recover approximately 50 per cent of the energy for the ascent so we will be saving more energy than originally envisaged.”

 

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Jul 21, 2003

35,303

• Jul 21, 2015

• #3

desprateseagull said:

http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/...lans-to-scrap-wind-turbine-from-the-top/41120

Wind turbine problems, and also rainwater harvesting set to be scrapped.. can't they work out a way to filter it, even for use to flush loos??

Click to expand...

er, why would they need to filter it for toilet use? my Grandma had water capture for the toilets and i think the shower, just gets stored, no filtering.

 

desprateseagull

New member

Jul 20, 2003

10,171

brighton, actually

• Jul 21, 2015

• Thread starter
• #4

Isn't the 'descent energy capture' already factored into original plans? I still see a 20% loss, from having no wind.. *parp*

 

vegster

Sanity Clause

May 5, 2008

27,892

• Jul 21, 2015

• #5

I like all the Green credentials they are trotting out, maybe they could have been even more Greener and not built the bloody thing in the first place.

 

Bill Cassidy's tie up

New member

Feb 9, 2011

1,047

Lancing

• Jul 21, 2015

• #6

Changing the subject slightly do you think they realised about the the sea fret we get often. Drove past yesterday and could only just about see the top at the height it is now.

 

Uncle C

Well-known member

Jul 6, 2004

11,683

Bishops Stortford

• Jul 21, 2015

• #7

Bill Cassidy's tie up said:

Changing the subject slightly do you think they realised about the the sea fret we get often. Drove past yesterday and could only just about see the top at the height it is now.

Click to expand...

Gosh I bet they forgot that.

 

Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...

Mar 18, 2010

29,789

Hove

• Jul 21, 2015

• #8

Everest said:

“The wind turbine was expected to generate around 20 per cent of the energy for the vertical cable car’s ascent.
But by capturing energy on the vertical cable car descent, we will recover approximately 50 per cent of the energy for the ascent so we will be saving more energy than originally envisaged.”

Click to expand...

If only he'd read the article before posting a spurious thread title...

 

C

CP 0 3 BHA

Well-known member

Nov 28, 2003

2,256

Northants

• Jul 21, 2015

• #9

Bold Seagull said:

If only he'd read the article before posting a spurious thread title...

Click to expand...

Agreed. It's a headline misleading enough to be worthy of The Argus!

 

P

portslade seagull

Well-known member

Jul 19, 2003

17,606

portslade

• Jul 21, 2015

• #10

wait till it starts rusting

 

Bill Cassidy's tie up

New member

Feb 9, 2011

1,047

Lancing

• Jul 21, 2015

• #11

Uncle C said:

Gosh I bet they forgot that.

Click to expand...

And I bet that wasn't factored into the equations when they worked out the returns. Don't get me wrong I love it arseh0le

 

Seasider78

Well-known member

Nov 14, 2004

5,937

• Jul 21, 2015

• #12

Call me a cynic but I can't help but think these things are put in to help it through planning a bit like our grass topped stadium that never materialised!!!

 

Bold Seagull

strong and stable with me, or...

Mar 18, 2010

29,789

Hove

• Jul 22, 2015

• #13

Seasider78 said:

Call me a cynic but I can't help but think these things are put in to help it through planning a bit like our grass topped stadium that never materialised!!!

Click to expand...

Cynic!!

Planning is a risk. The less money you put into a planning application, the less loss you will have if you are refused planning permission.

You therefore generally design something, whether a building or structure with an overall understanding that it will work, but you don't go to all the expense of detailed design and calculations / specification because that cost is an unnecessary risk at planning.

So you go in with a broadly understood scheme that if successful, you then get into the detailed construction. With all the consultants design input you then often have changes to the permitted scheme. These are either dealt with under the planning conditions, or you submit an application for minor amendments to the permitted scheme. If the changes were really significant then you may need to apply for planning permission again.

For a cutting edge unique bit of design, construction and engineering, I think you'd have to expect some design changes from the permitted scheme.